Paper detail

Cross-correlation of CFHTLenS galaxy catalogue and Planck CMB lensing using the halo model prescription

I cross-correlate the galaxy counts from the Canada-France Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS) galaxy catalogue and Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) convergence from the Planck data release 1 (2013) and 2 (2015), following the work of Omori & Holder (2015). I improve their study by computing an analytic covariance from the Halo Model, implementing simulations to validate the theoretically estimated error bars and the reconstruction method, fitting both a galaxy bias and a cross-correlation amplitude using the joint cross and galaxy auto-correlation, and performing a series of null tests. Using a bayesian analysis, I find a galaxy bias $b=0.92_{-0.02}^{+0.02}$ and a cross-correlation amplitude $A=0.85_{-0.16}^{+0.15}$ for the 2015 release, whereas for the 2013 release I find $b=0.93_{-0.02}^{+0.02}$ and $A=1.05_{-0.15}^{+0.15}$. I thus confirm the difference between the two releases found by Omori & Holder (2015), although both values of the amplitude now appear to be compatible with the fiducial value $A=1$.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.